New York State Court of Claims

New York State Court of Claims

WEBB v. THE STATE OF NEW YORK, #2008-016-020, Claim No. 110650, Motion Nos. M-74534, CM-74594


Synopsis


Claim served by regular mail was dismissed.

Case Information

UID:
2008-016-020
Claimant(s):
CHRISTOPHER WEBB
Claimant short name:
WEBB
Footnote (claimant name) :

Defendant(s):
THE STATE OF NEW YORK
Footnote (defendant name) :

Third-party claimant(s):

Third-party defendant(s):

Claim number(s):
110650
Motion number(s):
M-74534
Cross-motion number(s):
CM-74594
Judge:
Alan C. Marin
Claimant’s attorney:
Christopher Webb, Pro Se
Defendant’s attorney:
Andrew M. Cuomo, Attorney GeneralBy: James E. Shoemaker, Esq., AAG
Third-party defendant’s attorney:

Signature date:
May 12, 2008
City:
New York
Comments:

Official citation:

Appellate results:

See also (multicaptioned case)



Decision

In this claim, Christopher Webb alleges that he was wrongfully held in keeplock status at Sullivan Correctional Facility from June 8 to June 24, 2004. Mr. Webb moves for an order striking defendant’s answer and granting summary judgment in his favor. Defendant cross-moves for summary judgment dismissing the claim. In its cross-motion, defendant asserts that this claim was served by regular mail, a defense timely raised in the State’s answer as required by subdivision c of §11 of the Court of Claims Act (the “Act”). See ¶4 of the February 26, 2008 affirmation of James E. Shoemaker and exhibits B and C thereto. Claimant, who did not oppose defendant’s cross-motion, does not dispute that he served his claim by regular mail.

Section 11.a of the Act provides that a claim must be served on the State via the Attorney General either personally or by certified mail, return receipt requested. Regular mail is not an authorized method of service and its use is insufficient to obtain jurisdiction. See, e.g., Philippe v State of New York, 248 AD2d 827, 669 NYS2d 759 (3d Dept 1998). The Court thus lacks jurisdiction over this claim.

Accordingly, having reviewed the submissions,[1] it is ordered that cross-motion no. CM-74594 be granted and claim no. 110650 be dismissed. It is further ordered that motion no. M-74534 be denied as moot.

May 12, 2008
New York, New York

HON. ALAN C. MARIN
Judge of the Court of Claims




  1. [1]The Court reviewed claimant’s notice of motion with affidavit in support and exhibits A through D; and defendant’s notice of cross-motion with affirmation in support and exhibits A through C.